Investigating the Influence of Introducing Biophilic Elements into the Shopping Mall Environment: Perception of Public Visitors-Journal of Sustainability Research-CSCIED科技核心评价数据库-手机版

Investigating the Influence of Introducing Biophilic Elements into the Shopping Mall Environment: Perception of Public Visitors

Investigating the Influence of Introducing Biophilic Elements into the Shopping Mall Environment: Perception of Public Visitors

ES评分 0 浏览量：426 下载量：0

全文阅读下载引用收藏

DOI	10.20900/jsr20230011
刊名	Journal of Sustainability Research JSR
年，卷(期)	2023, 5(3)
作者	Ting Cheng*,Azizan Marzuki,
作者单位	School of Housing, Building and Planning, Universiti Sains Malaysia, George Town, Penang, 11800, Malaysia
Abstract	As a beloved destination place of urban public space, the public attitude towards shopping malls is significant to sustainable development. The aim of this study is to investigate the perception of biophilic design in relation to the landscape preferences of mall visitors and to assess visitor intentions, testing the impact, extent, and role of biophilic design elements. This study was conducted with a quantitative approach using a questionnaire survey method; the data were collected from 427 public visitors at an archetypal shopping mall in Shanghai, China. SmartPLS (version 4.0.9.2) was used to access a second-order measurement and structural model based on path modeling and bootstrapping. The results suggest a number of discoveries. Firstly, biophilic design has positive impacts on visitors’ landscape preference, and the approach facilitates revisit intentions and positive referrals within individuals. Secondly, the knowledge has been extended that beyond simply the green dimension (plants), visitors are able to holistically perceive biophilic design elements and subordinate attributes (e.g., curved lines, repeating patterns, spatial focal points). Lastly, biophilic design can create a restorative experience for mall visitors and can be viewed as a complementary service to provide the health benefits of an unstructured stay in a natural setting.
KeyWord	landscaping in shopping mall; biophilic design; preference studies; revisit intention; restorative experience; PLS-SEM
基金项目
页码	-

参考文献
相关文献

1. Beatley T. Biophilic Cities and Healthy Societies. Urban Plan. 2017;2(4):1-4. 2. O’Sullivan K, Shirani F, Hale R, Pidgeon N, Henwood K. Identity, place narrative and biophilic urban development: Connecting the past, present and future for sustainable liveable cities. Front Sustain Cities. 2023;5:1139029. 3. Cabanek A, Newman P, Nannup N. Indigenous landscaping and biophilic urbanism: case studies in Noongar Six Seasons. Sustain Earth Rev. 2023;6(1):1-19. 4. Radha CH. Biophilic design as a new approach in urban sustainability. Pollack Period. 2022;17(1):145-50. 5. Browning WD, Ryan CO, Clancy JO. 14 Patterns of Biophilic Design. Available from: https://www.terrapinbrightgreen.com/reports/14-patterns/. Accessed 2023 Oct 13. 6. Totaforti S. Emerging biophilic urbanism: The value of the human–nature relationship in the urban space. Sustainability. 2020;12(13):5487. 7. Zhong W, Schröder T, Bekkering J. Biophilic design in architecture and its contributions to health, well-being, and sustainability: A critical review. Front Archit Res. 2022;11(1):114-41. 8. Beiró MG, Bravo L, Caro D, Cattuto C, Ferres L, Graells-Garrido E. Shopping mall attraction and social mixing at a city scale. EPJ Data Sci. 2018;7(1):1-21. 9. Nguyen TVT, Han H, Sahito N. Role of urban public space and the surrounding environment in promoting sustainable development from the lens of social media. Sustainability. 2019;11(21):5967. 10. Susanti A, Natalia TW. Public space strategic planning based on Z generation preferences. Available from: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1757-899X/407/1/012076/pdf. Accessed 2023 Oct 13. 11. Shim C, Santos CA. Tourism, place and placelessness in the phenomenological experience of shopping malls in Seoul. Tour Manag. 2014;45:106-14. 12. Johnson AJ, Glover TD. Understanding urban public space in a leisure context. Leis Sci. 2013;35(2):190-7. 13. Zhang X, He Y. What makes public space public? The chaos of public space definitions and a new epistemological approach. Adm Soc. 2020;52(5):749-70. 14. Mendilcioğlu RF, Goudarzi SM. A sustainable solution of urban revitalization: Transformations of shopping malls. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Riza-Mendilcioglu/publication/333162576_A_Sustainable_Solution_of_Urban_Revitalization_Transformations_of_Shopping_Malls/links/5cde72eba6fdccc9ddb567d6/A-Sustainable-Solution-of-Urban-Revitalization-Transformations-of-Shopping-Malls.pdf. Accessed 2023 Oct 14. 15. Yin J, Fu P, Cheshmehzangi A, Li Z, Dong J. Investigating the Changes in Urban Green-Space Patterns with Urban Land-Use Changes: A Case Study in Hangzhou, China. Remote Sens. 2022;14(21):5410. 16. Nalbantlar B, Sumbul S, Hasirci D. Biophilic design components in shopping mall environments: Implications for design research, education, and practice. Available from: https://library.iated.org/view/NALBANTLAR2020BIO. Accessed 2023 Oct 14. 17. Blanco Cadena JD, Caramia M, Salvalai G, Quagliarini E. Using Digital Models of Built Environment Archetypes to Analyze and Communicate Climate Related Risk Outdoors. In: Blanco H, Bloffill Y, Lombillo I, Saez MP, editors. Rehabend 2022—9th Euro-American Congress on Construction Pathology, Rehabilitation Technology and Heritage Management. Granada (Spain): University of Cantabria; 2022. p. 1793-802. 18. Cheng T, Marzuki A. Research on the development of computer digital technology combined with commercial space landscape design in the theory of “design combined with nature”. Int J Commun Netw Inf Secur. 2023;15(1):84-94. 19. Mouratidis K. How covid-19 reshaped quality of life in cities: A synthesis and implications for urban planning. Land Use Policy. 2021;111:105772. 20. Zuhri S, Ghozali I. Architectural design practices in Surabaya: Shopping mall design with biophilic design approach. Int J Archit Arts Appl. 2020;6(2):17. 21. Kellert SR, Heerwagen J, Mador M. Biophilic design: the theory, science and practice of bringing buildings to life. Hoboken (US): John Wiley & Sons; 2008. 22. Naya RB, de la Cal Nicolás P, Medina CD, Ezquerra I, García-Pérez S, Monclús J. Quality of public space and sustainable development goals: analysis of nine urban projects in Spanish cities. Front Archit Res. 2023;12(3):477-95. 23. Rosenbaum MS, Ramirez GC, Camino JR. A dose of nature and shopping: The restorative potential of biophilic lifestyle center designs. J Retail Consum Serv. 2018;40:66-73. 24. Hami A, Moula FF, Maulan SB. Public preferences toward shopping mall interior landscape design in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Urban For Urban Green. 2018;30:1-7. 25. Shin M, Lee RH, Min JE, Legendre TS. Connecting nature with luxury service. Psychol Mark. 2023;40(2):300-16. 26. Hung SH, Chang CY. How do humans value urban nature? Developing the perceived biophilic design scale (PBDs) for preference and emotion. Urban For Urban Green. 2022;76:127730. 27. Wijesooriya N, Brambilla A. Bridging biophilic design and environmentally sustainable design: A critical review. J Clean Prod. 2021;283:124591. 28. Xue F, Gou Z, Lau SSY, Lau SK, Chung KH, Zhang J. From biophilic design to biophilic urbanism: Stakeholders’ perspectives. J Clean Prod. 2019;211:1444-52. 29. Ryan C, Browning W, Walker D. The economics of biophilia: Why designing with nature in mind makes financial sense. 2nd ed. New York (US): Terrapin Bright Green; 2023. 30. Rosenbaum MS, Otalora ML, Ramírez GC. The restorative potential of shopping malls. J Retail Consum Serv. 2016;31:157-65. 31. Lee SH, Tao CW, Douglas AC, Oh H. All that glitters is not green: Impact of biophilic designs on customer experiential values. J Hosp Tour Res. 2023;47(4):NP18-32. 32. Khozaei F, Carbon CC, Hosseini Nia M, Kim MJ. Preferences for hotels with biophilic design attributes in the post-covid-19 era. Buildings. 2022;12(4):427. 33. Joye Y, Willems K, Brengman M, Wolf K. The effects of urban retail greenery on consumer experience: Reviewing the evidence from a restorative perspective. Urban For Urban Green. 2010;9(1):57-64. 34. Zhang M, Du J, Yang M. Biophilia and visual preference for Chinese vernacular windows: an investigation into shape. J Asian Archit Build Eng. 2023;22(5):28-59. 35. Wolf KL. Public reponse to the urban forest in inner-city business districts. J Arboric. 2003;29(3):117-26. 36. Wolf KL. Trees and business district preferences: A case study of Athens, Georgia, US. J Arboric. 2004;30(6):336-46. 37. Brengman M, Willems K, Joye Y. The impact of in-store greenery on customers. Psychol Mark. 2012;29(11):807-21. 38. Kellert SR, Wilson EO. The biophilia hypothesis. Washington (US): Island Press; 1993. 39. Browning B. Biophilia, buildings, and your brain. People Strateg. 2016;39(2):8-11. 40. Bolten B, Barbiero G. Biophilic design: nine ways to enhance physical and psychological health and wellbeing in our built environments. In: Capolongo S, Botta M, Rebecchi A, editors. Therapeutic landscape design: Methods, design strategies and new scientific approaches. Cham (Switzerland): Springer International Publishing; 2023. p. 13-9. 41. Ahmad MH, Rasdi MTHM. Design principles of atrium buildings for the tropics
[dissertation]. Skudai (Malaysia): University of Technology Malaysia; 2000. 42. Hamat S. Leisure preference for people place at shopping malls in Kuala Lumpur and Petaling Jaya Malaysia
[dissertation]. Penang (Malaysia): University Sains Malaysia; 2012. 43. Neuman M, Chelleri L, Schuetze T. Post-pandemic urbanism: Criteria for a new normal. Sustainability. 2021;13(19):10600. 44. Söderlund J, Newman P. Biophilic Architecture: A review of the rationale and outcomes. AIMS Environ Sci. 2015;2(4):950-69. 45. Browning MH, Lee K, Wolf KL. Tree cover shows an inverse relationship with depressive symptoms in elderly residents living in US nursing homes. Urban For Urban Green. 2019;41:23-32. 46. Berman MG, Jonides J, Kaplan S. The cognitive benefits of interacting with nature. Psychol Sci. 2008;19(12):1207-12. 47. Hartig T, Korpela K, Evans GW, Gärling T. Validation of a measure of perceived environmental restorativeness. Göteb Psychol Rep. 1996;26:1-64. 48. Gillis K, Gatersleben B. A review of psychological literature on the health and wellbeing benefits of biophilic design. Buildings. 2015;5(3):948-63. 49. Zhang T, Liu J, Li H. Restorative effects of multi-sensory perception in urban green space: A case study of urban park in Guangzhou, China. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(24):4943. 50. Jahani A, Saffariha M. Aesthetic preference and mental restoration prediction in urban parks: An application of environmental modeling approach. Urban For Urban Green. 2020;54:126775. 51. Kong L, Liu Z, Pan X, Wang Y, Guo X, Wu J. How do different types and landscape attributes of urban parks affect visitors’ positive emotions? Landsc Urban Plan. 2022;226:104482. 52. Nordh H, Hartig T, Hagerhall CM, Fry G. Components of small urban parks that predict the possibility for restoration. Urban For Urban Green. 2009;8(4):225-35. 53. Wang X, Rodiek S, Wu C, Chen Y, Li Y. Stress recovery and restorative effects of viewing different urban park scenes in Shanghai, China. Urban For Urban Green. 2016;15:112-22. 54. Van den Berg AE, Jorgensen A, Wilson ER. Evaluating restoration in urban green spaces: Does setting type make a difference? Landsc Urban Plan. 2014;127:173-81. 55. Berto R. Exposure to restorative environments helps restore attentional capacity. J Environ Psychol. 2005;25(3):249-59. 56. Malekinezhad F, Courtney P, bin Lamit H, Vigani M. Investigating the mental health impacts of university campus green space through perceived sensory dimensions and the mediation effects of perceived restorativeness on restoration experience. Front Public Health. 2020;8:578241. 57. Rosenbaum MS, Wong IA. When gambling is healthy: the restorative potential of casinos. J Serv Mark. 2015;29(6/7):622-33. 58. Herranz-Pascual K, Aspuru I, Iraurgi I, Santander Á, Eguiguren JL, García I. Going beyond quietness: Determining the emotionally restorative effect of acoustic environments in urban open public spaces. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(7):1284. 59. Kaplan S. Cognitive maps in perception and thought. In: Downs RM, Stea D, editors. Image and environment: Cognitive mapping and spatial behavior. New York (US): Routledge; 1973. p. 63-78. 60. Kaplan R, Kaplan S. The experience of nature: A psychological perspective. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge university press; 1898. 61. Tveit MS, Ode Sang Å, Hagerhall CM. Scenic beauty: Visual landscape assessment and human landscape perception. Available from: https://www.agnesvandenberg.nl/scenicbeauty.pdf. Accessed 2023 Oct 14. 62. Van der Jagt AP, Craig T, Anable J, Brewer MJ, Pearson DG. Unearthing the picturesque: The validity of the preference matrix as a measure of landscape aesthetics. Landsc Urban Plan. 2014;124:1-13. 63. Spielhofer R, Hunziker M, Kienast F, Hayek UW, Grêt-Regamey A. Does rated visual landscape quality match visual features? An analysis for renewable energy landscapes. Landsc Urban Plan. 2021;209:104000. 64. Gao AE, Koole SL, van der Wulp NY. Environmental preference and restoration:(How) are they related? J Environ Psychol. 2003;23(2):135-46. 65. Korpela K, Hartig T. Restorative qualities of favorite places. J Environ Psychol. 1996;16(3):221-33. 66. Liu QY, Wu Y, Xiao YH, Huang QT, Lan SR. The Inherent Psychological Mechanism of Perceived Restoration of Urban Parks: An Perspective from Environmental Preference and Place Attachment Theory. Chin Landsc Archit. 2019;37:39-44. 67. Wang R, Zhao J, Meitner MJ, Hu Y, Xu X. Characteristics of urban green spaces in relation to aesthetic preference and stress recovery. Urban For Urban Green. 2019;41:6-13. 68. Twedt E, Rainey RM, Proffitt DR. Beyond nature: The roles of visual appeal and individual differences in perceived restorative potential. J Environ Psychol. 2019;65:101322. 69. Memari S, Pazhouhanfar M, Nourtaghani A. Relationship between perceived sensory dimensions and stress restoration in care settings. Urban For Urban Green. 2017;26:104-13. 70. Pazhouhanfar M, Kamal M. Effect of predictors of visual preference as characteristics of urban natural landscapes in increasing perceived restorative potential. Urban For Urban Green. 2014;13(1):145-51. 71. Gao T, Zhang T, Zhu L, Gao Y, Qiu L. Exploring psychophysiological restoration and individual preference in the different environments based on virtual reality. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(17):3102. 72. Hoyle H, Hitchmough J, Jorgensen A. All about the ‘wow factor’? The relationships between aesthetics, restorative effect and perceived biodiversity in designed urban planting. Landsc Urban Plan. 2017;164:109-23. 73. Ortegón-Cortázar L, Royo-Vela M. Nature in malls: Effects of a natural environment on the cognitive image, emotional response, and behaviors of visitors. Eur Res Manag Bus Econ. 2019;25(1):38-47. 74. Vilnai-Yavetz I, Gilboa S, Mitchell V. “There is no place like my mall”: consumer reactions to the absence of mall experiences. J Serv Mark. 2022;36(4):563-83. 75. Yang X, Zhang L. Smart tourism technologies towards memorable experiences for museum visitors. Tour Rev. 2022;77(4):1009-23. 76. Li M, Cai LA, Qiu S. A value, affective attitude, and tourist behavioral intention model. J China Tour Res. 2016;12(2):179-95. 77. Huang S, Zheng Y, Cheng LL, Ji CY, Wang S, Dong JW. The impact mechanism of urban park health benefit evaluation based on landscape preference. J Nanjing For Univ. 2022;46(5):221-8. 78. Wang XX, Wu CZ, Yan J. Experimental study of the perceived restorative scale (PRS) in Chinese by evaluating the restorative qualities of urban park scenes. Chin Landsc Archit. 2019;35(2):45-8. 79. Palmatier RW, Scheer LK, Steenkamp JBE. Customer loyalty to whom? Managing the benefits and risks of salesperson-owned loyalty. J Mark Res. 2007;44(2):185-99. 80. Zhang C. Research on influencing mechanism of tourists’ ecotourism perceived value on behavior intention
[dissertation]. Jiangsu (China): China University of Mining & Technology; 2021. 81. Becker JM, Cheah JH, Gholamzade R, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M. PLS-SEM’s most wanted guidance. Int J Contemp Hosp Manag. 2023;35(1):321-46. 82. Lak A, Aghamolaei R, Baradaran HR, Myint PK. A framework for elder-friendly public open spaces from the Iranian older adults’ perspectives: a mixed-method study. Urban For Urban Green. 2020;56:126857. 83. Shmueli G, Sarstedt M, Hair JF, Cheah JH, Ting H, Vaithilingam S, et al. Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: guidelines for using PLSpredict. Eur J Mark. 2019;53(11):2322-47. 84. Hair JF, Risher JJ, Sarstedt M, Ringle CM. When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. Eur Bus Rev. 2019;31(1):2-24. 85. Richter NF, Sinkovics RR, Ringle, CM, Schlaegel C. A critical look at the use of SEM in international business research. Int Mark Rev. 2016;33:376-404. 86. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences: second edition. Available from: https://www.utstat.toronto.edu/~brunner/oldclass/378f16/readings/CohenPower.pdf. Accessed 2023 Oct 14. 87. Bentler PM, Bonett DG. Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychol Bull. 1980;88(3):588-606. 88. Hair JF, Sarstedt M, Hopkins L, Kuppelwieser VG. Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Eur Bus Rev. 2014;26:106-21.

引用本文

Ting Cheng*,Azizan Marzuki. Investigating the Influence of Introducing Biophilic Elements into the Shopping Mall Environment: Perception of Public Visitors, Journal of Sustainability Research. 2023; 5; (3). https://doi.org/10.20900/jsr20230011.

文献评论

相关学者

相关机构